Rena Long-Term Environmental Recovery monitoring programme

Transcription

1 Rena Long-Term Environmental Recovery monitoring programme About the report Q. What is the Rena Long-Term Environmental Recovery Monitoring Programme? A comprehensive scientific sampling and monitoring programme of Bay of Plenty beaches, estuaries, coastline and offshore islands and kaimoana (seafood) and Otaiti Reef (Astrolabe). Q. Who funded the scientific monitoring? The monitoring was commissioned by the Rena Recovery programme, a $2.4 million Governmentfunded initiative. Q. Who undertook the monitoring? Te Mauri Moana, a collective led by Professor Chris Battershill, University of Waikato s coastal science professor. Te Mauri Moana harnesses the collective research capacity of the Bay of Plenty Tertiary Partnership that includes the University of Waikato, Bay of Plenty Polytechnic and Te Whare Wananga O Awanuiarangi. In addition, Manaaki Taha Moana, The University of Canterbury and the University of Bremen (INTERCOAST) made up the team. Additional environmental work has been carried out by MNZ, Cawthron Institute and NIWA. More focused work on Astrolabe Reef has been coordinated by BECA on behalf of the Rena owners with Cawthron Institute and Bioresearchers Ltd (University of Waikato assisted with survey design etc). Q. What s the purpose of the programme? We want to track the environmental recovery of the Bay of Plenty s coastal environment following the grounding of the MV Rena in October We want to know if the coastal environment is recovering from the Rena disaster, how well it s recovering, and what more needs to be done. The programme s aim is to realise restoration of the mauri, or life force, of the area. The role of the recovery monitoring programme is to track progress and identify areas of concern, possibly leading to remediation actions. Q. What has it involved? We looked at the condition of all the Bay of Plenty s habitats rocky reefs, rocky shores, open beaches, offshore islands and estuaries and the organisms that live there, including kaimoana such as fish and shellfish. Assessments were made of the ecology of each habitat system, demography of key species and the physiology of organisms, including any contaminant toxicity (PAHs and metals) in tissues of important and representative kaimoana. Q. How was the research conducted? The most comprehensive part of the programme initially was focused on beaches and estuaries. On rocky reefs, both between high and low tides and in areas which are always under water, ecological surveys and diversity profiles were confirmed by sampling representative kaimoana species for PAHs and metals contamination. We tested 75 different low tide places in the harbour, and took core samples from the bottom of the sea and the beaches. The researchers also took photographs of the surface to find out what animals and algae were present and count them, including all the crab holes. Samples of kaimoana species were frozen for PAH and chemical analyses. Other samples were taken for reproductive assessment.

2 We took samples from each site to check for heavy metals, pesticides, decaying matter, chemicals, bacteria and nutrients that could have come from run-off water from land. Marine animals were tested in the sea and also in clean freshwater to see if the results were the same. We ve been working for more than 20 months for the first phase until early October 2013, continuing into a second winter after the grounding. Scientists from four Universities worked together, along with their research students. Q. How have you worked with the community? This research has been a unique blend of western science and Mātauranga Māori Māori knowledge. From day one, we ve worked comprehensively with the community through a robust and continuing volunteer programme with regular and far-reaching public presentations of findings over the last two years. More than 100 presentations have now been given. At every step the scientists have talked to the locals and given them monthly reports about what they are finding out, as well as taking into account Māori knowledge, which has been a vital part of our work. What we found: Q. How has the environment been affected? In general, the grounding has had little long-term effect, bearing in mind that we are slightly more than 20 months of monitoring in an ongoing programme. We found most environmental areas recovered quickly, partly because NZ Defence Force, contractors and volunteers cleaned the worst debris off the beaches and rocks so quickly. However, some areas, like the northern end of Mōtītī Island, were re-exposed to pollutants during storms. We re still monitoring this area and the reef. Marine animals like pipi, cockles and mussels returned back to near-normal levels within four months, and their condition has improved since. These shellfish pick up PAHs quickly, but also released them quickly with little evidence of physiological damage. Effects on kaimoana: Q. What were the environmental effects and potential food safety effects on our seafood? Kaimoana was contaminated along beaches, with raised levels of Rena PAHs after storms. We ve consistently found that there was never an identifiable food safety risk from Rena to people eating seafood gathered after the grounding. The research to date suggests that kaimoana has recovered from any environmental effects, because reproduction is happening normally for key species we examined. However there is still a risk from PSP [paralytic shellfish poisoning]. Q. Can we eat kaimoana now? Yes if Rena was the only issue. We need to be aware of PSP [paralytic shellfish poisoning] along the coastline. This is naturally occurring and not related to the Rena grounding. Toi Te Ora Public Health issues regular warnings about this. Currently (December 2013) there is a warning about not eating shellfish along the Bay of Plenty coast. Read more on Toi te Ora s website:

3 Q. Which varieties have been contaminated? All organisms on the beach would have been affected by oil to varying degrees on beaches hit hard by the initial oil spill. We focused on examining tuatua, which were likely to be most affected, and which were representative of an ecologically-important species group as well as being important kaimoana. We have found changes in the size and location of tuatua populations, but these occur naturally so we can t be absolutely sure that the changes are the result of Rena oil. However, good populations of tuatua are still present on even the worst initially affected beaches. Q. What about fin fish? We did ecotoxicology lab experiments on snapper and flounder for PAH and Corexit exposure, and we know fin fish are affected at high concentrations. However there s unlikely to be significant effects in estuaries and along the coast because of relatively low levels of oil in the water column when the ship lost heavy fuel oil. We re finding out more through a comprehensive monitoring programme around Otaiti Reef and from ongoing laboratory eco-toxicity experiments. Q. Is oil still affecting marine life? It will in a limited way where any tar balls land, but for the wider Bay there won t be much effect. We re working out what has come from Rena above usual effects (such as oil products coming off the roads during storms through drains, and from other shipping and pleasure boat activities. The results of this monitoring will be reported later. The Rena owners have commissioned intensive survey work around Otaiti. Long-term effects: Q. How do you know what the long-term effects are when you ve only monitored for two years? The evidence to date is that there has only been low to negligible effects, and the situation seems to be improving and so long term effects are unlikely. We haven t seen any catastrophic die-offs and reproduction is happening normally for key species. Also, Rena PAHs are low now. This report covers the first two years of an ongoing study, and we agree more work is needed on key areas. Q. How do you know whether contaminants have affected future sea life reproduction? The work we ve done on the most affected species, tuatua, from the most affected beaches, shows no problems. We believe that ongoing monitoring should continue to assess any long-term effects at Otaiti (Astrolabe Reef). A number of studies aimed at examining recruitment events of kaimoana at Otaiti and Mōtītī are underway. Q. Has our food chain been affected? There s no food safety risk from contamination resulting from the grounding. While levels of contamination are higher near the ship, this does not translate into increased risk for human health. The effect is negligible for the wider region, but there was some contamination near the ship where reef species are. We have done intensive surveys, more work is planned and the exclusion zone is still in place. Q. How long does it take oil to break down in the water and sand?

4 This will depend on many factors, including the type of oil, sea conditions, water temperature etc. We do know from the research that it is now difficult to find evidence of oil on the beaches or in sand samples taken deeper down. Again, there is a research project examining this detailing microbial decomposition. What s happening at Otaiti Reef: Q. What is happening out on the reef itself? Comprehensive monitoring near the reef is continuing, led by Beca representing the owners. We re providing science and monitoring advice, and a report is due soon. The monitoring includes replicated sampling sites near and distant to the ship and also on other offshore reefs. Q. How could we return this area to its pre-rena state? How long will that take? Remove all debris, especially material that could chemically interact with organisms on the reef. Once this is gone we should see fast recovery on Otaiti as the reef is an exposed site and has a good feed of larvae from other nearby reefs systems. Effects on iwi: Q. What do these results mean for Mōtītī iwi? Mōtītī is still an issue because it s close to the Rena wreck. Iwi s focus is on total restoration of the mauri [life force], and we are not there yet. What happens next: Q. What have you learned from the Rena research? We ve learned more about the resilience of environments and the importance of a fast cleanup after an incident. We now have much-needed and detailed information on the effects in real NZ conditions of HFO and other contaminant mixtures on NZ species. We didn t have this information before, so it was hard to predict impacts and time to recovery. Q. How will this research influence marine science globally? This is the first environmental recovery research programme on a major marine incident in the world that combines western science with matauranga Māori [traditional Māori beliefs]. This helps the scientists ensure their research actually meets the needs of the people it s affecting. We d also done research before the grounding to find out how healthy Tauranga Harbour was, so we had before and after results. The work we did on what happened to the oil is another world first. Bacteria in the water actively destroyed some of the oil before it reached the coast, helping recovery considerably. We didn t know this before. The study is also unique in that in combines a multi-disciplinary large scale, multi habitat, multi year survey with detailed laboratory investigations. Ecology, chemistry, microbiology, ecotoxicity, hydrodynamics and Matauranga are combined. It deals with a living marine pollution incident in real time with day zero information. That means we know with good quantitative information, what

5 the range of habitats were like before Rena lost oil and debris, so we can predict a return to a pre Rena state. Q. What is there still to do? We need to follow up on any long-term effects, and focus work on Astrolabe Reef (Otaiti). We re here for the very long haul. The students who started as volunteers or summer school scholars on Rena Recovery are working on higher degrees and careers in marine and environmental science. They have cut their teeth on one of the world s most complex marine disasters and will be in high demand. Q. Have you learned other useful information from this research? We now know more about what will happen when oil is swept ashore, how it affects New Zealand flora and fauna species and how long it takes to recover. We know much more about HFO itself (previously there was very little useful environmentally-relevant information) and we know much more about contaminant mixtures in real life pollution incidents. We have also seen the beneficial effects of a co-ordinated fast response clean-up. Corexit: Q. Reports on the dispersant Corexit used in other countries have shown effects. What effect has it had on the Bay of Plenty? We did a risk assessment on the use of Corexit and determined that its use was so transient and at such low levels that it posed no risk at all. The only effects reported were in laboratory studies with no relevance to the use of Corexit in the Rena incident. It was applied in offshore windy conditions with huge dilution. The dispersant did not appear to mix with the HFO at sea, so natural weathering on the surface will have happened, with little movement into the water column.